I like watching Elvis and Plushy, however they are just as bad as the "shock jocks " that TRY to rationalize F.S. is not a sport. As others are pointing out, do 2 triples in place of one quad or something... I think the real issue is that the Quad is the "additional" factor you can add to your programme. It is an embellishment that is imo a added feature to the base of the program. And really what does Elvis know .... 6.0.

I think these guys take so much crap for being F.S. guys and people call them feminine that they over compensate. It is simple. Whether you like the C.O.P or not work with what is there.

Elvis has completely gotten the sport confused with freestyle motocross or Karate. When a majority of the skaters of "lore" are commenting "not NECESSARY but can do it if they want," you would think that the comments of the 6.0 was to corruptible and need to be changed could be understood. People were sick of seeing the 6.0 or it would still be there. Imo a quad should be equile to a 2scx2t AND the g.o.e. on the landing / exit should be more strict when a quad is scoured. It is one more careless action to pull the quad where as increasing falling - which casual fans think if a skater falls they loose, why perpetuate that? Loose more viewers. ? Is the quad the real value "macho image?" Is that real an improvement to FS? Are they just upset that they spent all that effort learning it and it is not even required?

Maybe they like people who "drill into medal without protective goggles and gloves - maybe they should go out to lunch with my dad who took me out of F.S when I was 7 because it wasn't macho and talk about all skaters competing at the same time with the ability to check others and the last skater standing wins.

Do it if you want, lower the point value and the T.S. should score it with HIGH deduction potential I say.

And before I hear I am bashing Elvis, realize EVERYONE he is bashing in his comments.

The BIGGEST issue with F.S. is the corrupt judging. May just 3 out of the panel, but there is still corruption in judging. Immediate point notification is the only way to stat to combat this imo. It would quickly bring the offenders to attention of the rest of the judges and they would no longer be asked to come and leave immediately. That is what you quad studs should be focusing your attention on. Copasetic in accepting flaws is the leader of degradation.

Last edited by SeaniBu; 03-02-2010 at 06:47 PM.
Reason: I guess I was in a bad mood and offended by E

Elvis didn't say Mao deserved to win because of one jump. He just said the gap should be closer, which is not different from what a lot of people here think.

Here's what's been bothering me about Elvis and everyone saying these things.

The current base values are not secret. Why did he and others not voice these concerns the last time the ISU convened? Doing it after the Olympics are finished when the current champions won using programs developed under the current system sounds like sour grapes. Even if it isn't, it SOUNDS like it.

I wish people would instead be specific, like "the specific judging I take issue with is the GOE on Evan's 2nd triple axel, which should have been -1.56 instead of -0.56 because he pitched forward so much, and Evgeny should have received +2 instead of +1 GOE on his double axel because of the height, and if they had graded GOE correctly Evgeni would have won."

I'm tired of hearing Elvis say that base values for quads and 3A are not enough, the media does not adjust base values, don't bring these concerns to them. Either say which specific GOE, levels, or PCs were not called correctly AND how that would have affected the outcome or don't address the results.

The judges didn't "choose" Evan or Yu-Na over Evgeny or Mao, it was the sum of many elements and I love the breakdown of the protocols and arguing over whether each PCs was right and debating whether edge or rotation calls were correct but that's where this discussion has to be, at the protocols, not the final result.

I understand the frustration of inconsistency across competitions on GOE, PCs, and edge and rotation calls, but I thought Kristi Yamaguchi addressed it well on the UniversalSports Review & Preview show when she said sometimes you are overscored and sometimes you are underscored but over your career it tends to even out. I know that's tough if you think you're underscored at the Olympics instead of some GP cup, but I would hope skaters would do everything within their control to not give the judges ANY excuse to underscore them with a program layout to maximize points within the CURRENT ISU system, and land every jump with the correct edge, rotation, and fast and smooth landings. With the example of Evgeny(not to pick on him but his silver is the one most talked about), he did not do that. He did not have as good a COP program as he could have and his skate could have been better. That was within his control, not the judges scores. Evgeny and other skaters should look back at his FS and figure out what he could have done or performed differently to get higher scores, not complain that the judging was subjective.

No worries, Elvis Stojko is so strong, I'm sure he'll take it all in stride. *wink* He knows exactly what he's doing. *smile*

Oh, yes. Now is Elvis' big come back as a figure skater; He expresses provocative opinions that he knows will be debated. All winter-world nations have their eyes on Vancouver. What is a better opportunity to be noticed, when your own ice show is taking off? Very well planned timing, Elvis, and nothing wrong with that.

Originally Posted by chloepoco

I'm not defending him per se, I'm just saying he's allowed to have his opinion without people starting new threads about him such as this one. I believe there already is a thread about him (and if some of those are not hateful remarks directed at him, I don't know what is).

Don't worry. He will be pleased with every thread started about him as a person, his skating and/or his opinions. All PR is …...

So just go on bashing him, critizising him, hating him, loving him. The win is his

I would think that this Olympic Men's Champion won't win any of these three competitions, unless of course, the judges want to give it to him.

Re: the 3 part awards for figure skating: Tech, PC, and Combined Why not? Alpine skiing has Downhill, Slalom and Combined. It's all about skiing.
If Plush won the Tech and Evan the silver. If Dai won the PC and Evan the Silver. That leaves Evan the Combined. That happens, you know.

Re: the 3 part awards for figure skating: Tech, PC, and Combined Why not? Alpine skiing has Downhill, Slalom and Combined. It's all about skiing.
If Plush won the Tech and Evan the silver. If Dai won the PC and Evan the Silver. That leaves Evan the Combined. That happens, you know.

For God's sake, Joe, if not considering Plushy, there are Dai, Lambiel, Abbott, Chan, Oda, Weir, ... you name it. Lysacek won't be the silver on PC.

For God's sake, Joe, if not considering Plushy, there are Dai, Lambiel, Abbott, Chan, Oda, Weir, ... you name it. Lysacek won't be the silver on PC.

I do like your idea of three part competitions though.

Well if the judges that marked the Oly LP marked the same programmes the same way then Evan and Plush would share the Bronze medal in PCS, with Dai taking gold and Stephane the silver. Johnny would be in the lowly 7th place with 5.5 points lower than the joint Evan and Plush score.

I was going to say that last night but then I forgot. Lambiel and Dai still had the highest pcs of the night despite not being at their best. And if judges would mark more carefully they should have pcs around 90s, especially Dai cause Stephane was a bit mechanic there. And Weir better marks

The current base values are not secret. Why did he and others not voice these concerns the last time the ISU convened? Doing it after the Olympics are finished when the current champions won using programs developed under the current system sounds like sour grapes. Even if it isn't, it SOUNDS like it.

A lot of federations did voice this concern and the values were already raised in response. I'd like to hear from Elvis et al what value he think a 4T should get? Right now, the base is 9.8 and the 3 ax is 8.2. I could agree with the quad being 11.0 even and a 3 ax 10 even, but I think that's the limit. Taking the 4T to 11 wouldn't have changed the result but 11.5, probably would have. The only thing is, then you'd have the opposite arguments flying to this one: the figure jumper won, his other elements were weak, that's not artistic to me, the quad is worth too much.....No matter what the ISU does, it won't please everybody. I personally prefer it the way it is. I only wish Daisuke could have skated clean so we could have avoided this whole mess.

A lot of federations did voice this concern and the values were already raised in response. I'd like to hear from Elvis et al what value he think a 4T should get? Right now, the base is 9.8 and the 3 ax is 8.2. I could agree with the quad being 11.0 even and a 3 ax 10 even, but I think that's the limit. Taking the 4T to 11 wouldn't have changed the result but 11.5, probably would have. The only thing is, then you'd have the opposite arguments flying to this one: the figure jumper won, his other elements were weak, that's not artistic to me, the quad is worth too much.....No matter what the ISU does, it won't please everybody. I personally prefer it the way it is. I only wish Daisuke could have skated clean so we could have avoided this whole mess.

You see this is why i always end up being against raising the value of individual elements because it ends up making me feel like one or two elements are singled out as being the be all and end all of a programmes. If, for example, a triple axel's Base Value was raised to 10, that would mean that it would be worth two triple loops. If the scoring of combo's and sequences is not changed then it would mean a triple axel would be worth the same as a 3Lp+3Lp+COMBO. That to me seems wrong. As difficult as a triple axel is, I feel that a 3Lp/3Lp is more difficult, it must be, under 6.0 Eric Millot is the only man I can think of to complete that combination though i'm certainthere are at least a couple more men that completed it, and all of them had triple axels in their arsenal too. It would also mean that a triple axel would be just under three times the value of a level 4 change foot combo spin. That definitely doesn't seem right and as much as the jumps do skew the technical score, it would make it even greater.

That is why, for me, a better idea than just raising the point value of a couple of elements would be to fix the scoring of combinations and sequences so they get bonuses such that there is a recognition that a 2/3 combo is harder than a 3/2. Maybe some more unsual combos e.g. 2/2/3 would come about if the multiplier gets higher for the second and third jumps. Fix the sequence rules so that while seuqences linked by hops etc earn bonuses that aren't as high as combos but they earn more points than the individual jumps (and certainly aren't penalised by 0.8 as they currently are - they'd have to rework the phantom SEQ rules for Zayak violations too). But the best idea would be the bonus points for showing each kind of triple take off for the ladies (maybe a bonus for five take offs) and a bonus for showing each type of take off as a triple for the men together with a bigger bonus for showing all take off and a quad.

Another problem with the current SOV values is that doubles and singles are undervalued. The big point changes in the systems values occur between the Lz and A jumps. If you look at the increase from 2Lz to 2A the points increase from 1.9 to 3.5 (an 84% increase in value) whereas from a 3Lz to a 3A the point increase is 6 to 8.2 (an increase of 36%).

This disparity IMO leads to the issue of a 3Lz-3T being worth 0.5 more than a 3A-2T. If the same increase were used between the 2Lz and the 2A the 2Lz would then be valued at 2.5 points and if a the same basic reductions were used for the other double jumps them 3A-2T would be worth 0.1 more in base value than the 3Lz-3T. This IMO would be a better reflection of both combinations worth. ie. they are roughly equal in difficulty.